3 ms·
Serious question: shouldn't Wayland be done over HTTPS? Or any desktop protocol? At least some kind of encryption, I assume. Maybe it is, and I just don't kn
by bin0 7y ago
Serious question: shouldn't Wayland be done over HTTPS? Or any desktop protocol? At least some kind of encryption, I assume. Maybe it is, and I just don't know?
- progval 7y agoYou don't need encryption for a local protocol, and wayland does not support remote desktops (yet?). And there is not reason to use HTTPS for Wayland instead of a lower level protocol.
- jsd1982 7y agoSSH is mentioned numerous times as a transport protocol. SSH, in case you were unaware, is implemented using TLS.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> SSH, in case you were unaware, is implemented using TLS. No, it's not; SSH’s transport layer component, as I understand it, provides functionality loosely comparable to TLS, but SSH does not rely on, assume, use, or incorporate TLS in any way.
- mehrdadn 7y agohttps://crypto.stackexchange.com/a/60256 https://crypto.stackexchange.com/a/60256
- awalton 7y agoHTTPS would be overkill. TLS would require certificates and nobody's going to put up with that for simple network transparency. It already works over SSH and that's pretty much optimal as far as most of us are concerned...
- bin0 7y agoFair enough, that answers the question. Sorry about the ignorance; I was more wondering if there was some kind of encryption.
- nine_k 7y agoSome form of encrypted channel, already deployed everywhere and well-understood? Like SSH?